Is overtaking on the track important?

[Dani Filth]

nice put there . toth

[Schummy]

It is nearly obvious that any professional sport lives because of fans. So in the long term, fans myst be heard one way or another. Big brands/constructors pay only because there are fans watching. So we the fans are the ultimate decider if we choose to not watch races.

FIA is not too worried just now because they maintain apparently a good amount of audience. If audience crumbles it is going to be hard to recover because nowadays most of that big audience is a "shallow" audience not a die hard enthusiast of F1 that never will abandon following autosport.

Relatively very few people knows something about F1 appart from some driver names and some team names. Very few journalist knows something about it. The exception is UK and probably Italy.

F1 is not soccer, US football or baseball. Those sport have a huge base of people who are able to talk about it during the week. They know stadiums, players, trainers, some history... etc. Many journalist live of soccer, football, baseball.

Soccer, football, baseball hardly will lose a big part of fans in the near future. F1 is very different, I certainly can see as possible that F1 comes back to the relatively small audience it had in 70s or 60s if things go "bad".

[Toth]

I don't mind if F1 changes. It must, it always had and will continue to change for the remainder of it's existence. As long as its for the right reasons.

In my view, increasing entertainment value is not a good reason, since F1 is a sport and not a show.

And why are large numbers of shallow fans neccesary? I don't care if the winning team has $200 million to spend, or $200 thousand. As long as the best team wins.

[Toth]

BTW, I'm sorry for going a bit off-topic, my post's were better suited for the "is F1 dull-thread".

To be at least a bit on-topic I'll admit that I'm the third lollygagger. Overtaking is fun, but not essential for me.

[1200Datto27]

The main problems is actually the TV producers, If they stopped giving us lap after lap of MS cruising in the lead, and started to show what was happening in the midfield, then I believe that people would see a lot more exciting racing, with overtaking going on.

[Teretonga]

Yes overtaking is important.
Toth.
I understand your point but please remeber that in the last ten-fifteen years there have been a number of changes to the rules which were supposed to increase the entertainment value of the sport and many of those changes have put the sport into a straight jacket technically and sportingly which has actually resulted in diminished entertainment.
If we went back to the old 964321 points system, allowed one car teams, mandated a rules package which reduced the dependence on high priced technological improvement, banned refuelling, etc so we ran races the way they did in the 60's/70's your argument might carry more weight.

What we have now, if you'll excuse the term, is a '(the auto sensor didn't excuse the term!)isation' of the original sporting concept. I would love to see a return to a more sensible rules and regulation package. The sport has already transgressed far from the original sporting nature for the sake of entertainment, what many of the 'armchair enthusiasts' on this forum would like to see is a return to the ethos of the original 'sporting code'.
I'm not talking about the professionalism here, the sport needed some of that, but it has brought with it changes made for the sake of money (entertainment) and some have that has actually been quite harmful and resulted in the type of racing we have today.

[Gt_R]

Overtaking is good to watch, fun to see, and nice to coo about.

Firstly, people have to be able to understand what are the teams and drivers fighting for?

To win, to get maximum points. F1 didn't have a rule which says that they MUST overtake to win, neither does it award points for overtaking. So is overtaking important in that context? Nope. F1 is MORE than just overtaking, and there are many different forms of battles, or points of interests.

However, from the casual viewer's point, is overtaking important? It's like watching a movie...we watch to see a story, to see action, to see drama. And overtaking is the "drama" during a race, because that's the thing we can SEE during a race. Nobody can see "the pit-to-car radio comm", nobody can see Williams designing/testing new parts, nobody can see the driver's face during a race.

And hence, from a viewer's point, overtaking is important as it provides the SHOW. It's the sign of "battle"..where cars are close to each other. Pit-strategy may have suspense, but the cars are alone doing their own thing..overtaking has cars close together fighting, providing visual entertainment, drama and suspense.

IMO, it would be more appropriate if F1 has more battles, not just overtaking... battles where people fight for position not knowing who may come out on top. It may be on track and involving overtaking (or failed overtakings).

So often we see a fast car just overtaking a slow car, without drama, the slow car just keeps a clean line and seems to like just say "after you". It's like watching goals scored where the keeper stands at the sides watching. What i would rather like to see is on-track battles...where one is desperate to attack, the other eager to defend.

Overtaking is good to see, important to keep viewers interests..but is it the reason why teams/drivers are here?

[300kph]

I wonder where Andrew wants to arrive with this question...

[Red]

Sure Bert, always glad to be of service.

good grief! Some of the replies are... oh well..

Nothing further to add to what Toth has said. Excellent.

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by Gt_R

Overtaking is good to see, important to keep viewers interests..but is it the reason why teams/drivers are here?

Of course it is. They just don't realise it anymore.

How long do you think F1 would survive if all GPs were held behind closed doors with no spectators and no TV coverage at all. Where would the kudos be then for winning one or other championship?


I agree F1 should be motor sport and not jacked up/hyped up (call it whatever you will) as motor entertainment but the reality is that it has to be both, like it or not. And for a lot of people (but not everyone, I accept), it just aint entertainment any more......

[Red]

Originally posted by Aysedasi

I agree F1 should be motor sport and not jacked up/hyped up (call it whatever you will) as motor entertainment but the reality is that it has to be both, like it or not. And for a lot of people (but not everyone, I accept), it just aint entertainment any more......

I like the "not everyone" part. Extremely spot on. For the other part, competiton is fun. Not the entertainent. Having a F1 designed specifically to "entertain" will degrade the sport. So far, upon mass requests, Max is rapidly heading this route.

[Dani Filth]

were there so many fans to entertain in the 30' 40' 50' ?? . why did they raced then ??

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by Red
I like the "not everyone" part. Extremely spot on. For the other part, competiton is fun. Not the entertainent. Having a F1 designed specifically to "entertain" will degrade the sport. So far, upon mass requests, Max is rapidly heading this route.

Sorry, I don't quite follow why trying to make the sport vaguely entertaining is such a terrible concept? Surely F1 has become sufficiently degraded over the last few years by the likes of completely unnecessary refuelling stops - if F1 needed refuelling stops to make it entertaining, there must have been something sadly wrong with it beforehand.....

You can go to your local circuit and watch minor series, whether they are single-seaters, sports cars, saloons, whatever. And they normally put on a darned good scrap. We need some racing, not just competition. We might as well put automatons in the cars and fly them by wire, except all we need to do is to make the programming for the robot in the #1 Ferrari more competent than the rest......

[Red]

Yes. It is a terrible concept. This is a sport. And a show. But in this very order. Not the other way around. Too bad you don't loke it. If they change the rules, like they do now by the way, in order to promote "fun" *I* will not like it anymore. And for a good reason. I want to watch a sport, not a cabaret show.

[Aysedasi]

Frankly, I find the current F1 surprisingly close to your "cabaret show" description. Certainly a great deal closer than I think it's ever been in the past.

But there you go. Each to his own. Just like anyone else I can exercise my choice in the most obvious way by either not watching, or tuning in and falling asleep......

Last words on this, the debate is becoming almost as boring as the "racing"........

[pirenzo]

The thing is I don't ever remember a season with loads of overtaking in it...
I'm not particularly bothered, and overtaking moves are just that bit more special when they occur less often.
Looking back at "nine days in summer" - a film following the development and racing endevours of the Lotus 49 and the Cosworth DFV in their first season, 1967 - most of the races were processional even then. Of course they broke down and ran out of fuel much more often, which I think was part of the lottery of racing back then. IMO if cars only finished half the races you'd get a greater variety of winners in a season and there'd be that much more excitement in a way.

[Dani Filth]

so .. FIA should do a program that would choose random cars to DNF .. that would make the season interesting .. nope . no way P

[RWC]

There is an option missing in this poll
"what kind of sicko question is that?"

[Gt_R]

I understand the point that F1 requires the support of audience, same as soccer and every other major sports.

But that makes us lose one important point - are we here to watch a show or are we here to watch a sports event.

I won't complain if we have plenty of overtakings and battles. But what is important is that F1 remains first a sports, second an entertainment event.

It's alright if we try to spice up the show and make small tweaks to improve it, but i'd be dismayed if we bring the concept of introducing overtaking too far and end up with manufactured racing... Nascar has many lead changes and overtakings...but somehow, rarely do they impress.

Quote pat symonds : " the serious answer is that we need to consider this as part of one of the elements that I was talking about of improving the spectacle. The trouble is, firstly it is not easy to say what will improve the spectacle. You talk of overtaking and yes, I think it is true that overtaking is important but is overtaking everything? If we get to the point of racing like NASCAR, where there are lead changes all the time, is that necessarily what we want? On the other hand we are starting to see a big increase in television spectators for the World Rally Championship and there, there is no overtaking by definition. What we are seeing is guys really taking the car to the limit in a way that is very obvious and that is not something you see in Formula One. If you watch a WRC car you think ‘yeah, that guy is good, I don’t think I could do that’. Unfortunately Formula One cars are so sophisticated that when you watch them you actually believe you could do it, so we need to look at lots of things. Overtaking is an important aspect but it is also a very difficult aspect to understand. It is too difficult in Formula One at the moment. A number of studies have been done on aspects of overtaking and those are being studied again at the moment and I hope that they are part of a total package that does bring in the new Formula One, if you like."

Basically, while entertainment is a good thing to have in F1, we shouldnt go down the route of the likes of BTCC... the priority should always be having a good set of rules which enables competition.

[Aysedasi]

Absolutely. But a racing series where the experts accept that overtaking is just "too difficult" leaves rather a lot to be desired.....

[Gt_R]

Yes, and that is a problem with regulations, and the track/cars..not the drivers and teams

Teams are not required to volunteer building cars that are overtaken-friendly, drivers are not required to overtake for the sake of audience.

If the rules for cars, though sensible ways, are created in a way that it helps in overtaking and tight competition, then i'm all for it. But if we create rules which are biased in it's intentions..then i'd question what F1 is seriously about.

[paddy]

MS said on TV today that he just wants to win and he doesn't care how. Which I understand. Change the regs so drivers have to race. The sport belongs to everyone involved and the people in charge of it need to remember that.

[Aysedasi]

I fully understand that every driver out there (anmd every team) just wants to win. But ask Schuey which he prefers, winning by virtue of a better pit stop or winning because he actually raced a couple of other guys and maybe overtook someone, and I think we know what the answer would be.

[Kicking-back]

That's what they asked him - would you have preferred to pass Alonso on the track. He said he wasn't bothered.

[Dani Filth]

someone recalled Dijon 79 . i've seen that race a few time . and it was unbelivable . but .... does anybody remembers Malaysia 2004 ??. Trulli-Button . i thought they had a nice little battle in the beginning of the race .